Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susan Parker

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep. A source has been provided to verify a pretty notable claim. Pastordavid (talk) 22:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Susan Parker

Notablity not asserted as per WP:N, inadequate third party references. Amnewsboy (talk) 15:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:BIO. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 16:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per both above. Getting beaten in a statewide election and then being a party delegate a couple of times makes one a "notable politician" in the same sense that getting cut from your high school hockey team and then attending a couple of games makes you a "notable hockey player". Psinu^{always forgets}_{to sign} 16:55, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I've put in refs she now meets Wikipedias notability criteria for politicians which states; "Politicians who have held international, national or statewide/provincewide office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislature". Parker has held and currently holds a statewide office. RMHED (talk) 17:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Please note. Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability according to WP:BIO. Nevertheles she has second party reliable sources such as this [1]--Neon white (talk) 18:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Should, or should not, all members of all this Public Service Commission get an entry? It seems to me they are doing jobs some mid-level bureaucrats have in other countries, so I lean to delete, but this is really foreign to me. Greswik (talk) 18:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The difference being they were elected, rather than appointed. RMHED (talk) 21:17, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I get that. But to be notable as a politician you need to have some important office - as Neon white also was on to. If we agree this is just some mid-level bureaucrat's job I certainly think delete. Greswik (talk) 21:54, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:BIO. This bureaucratic post qualifies for "statewide office" the same way that being the local dog catcher qualifies you for being a "town official." RGTraynor 01:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I do not think the state public service commission is a sufficiently important office to meet the spirit of the guideline, in the absence of other notability.DGG (talk) 01:44, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As i demonstrated she has significant second party coverage to achieve notability regardless of her position. --Neon white (talk) 04:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not 100% convinced that a single appearance/interview on a public affairs program constitutes adequate 2nd party coverage. Is there more out there on this gal? Amnewsboy (talk) 09:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: A single reliable source would not, in fact, satisfy WP:V. Furthermore, such sources must be about the subject. Do we have any actual biographical sources? RGTraynor 11:36, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: if she's notable, I'd say it's not for her current public office (which is not notable) but because she was the first woman to be nominated for a Senate seat in Alabama, which would make her of note historically. Is this true? Yikes. -- phoebe/(talk) 00:26, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Susan Parker has held two major statewide offices, Alabama State Auditor and Alabama Public Service Commission member, was the first woman to run for U.S. Senate in Alabama, and is mentioned as a possible candidate for Alabama Governor in 2010. --TommyBoy (talk) 02:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.